Mitchel L. Winick: Reasons for NPS dismissals unclear

The dismissal of Naval Postgraduate School President Dan Oliver and Provost Leonard Ferrari was a shock to our community.

Leaders of our higher education community have worked closely with these two professionals for many years. They are highly respected colleagues who have represented NPS, the Navy and our region with integrity and honor.

This is an opinion shared by the distinguished NPS Board of Advisers in Washington, D.C., quoted in a recent Herald article as saying, "Their (Oliver and Ferrari) exemplary leadership and professional contributions have added substantially to the quality of NPS."

Reading the published Navy Inspector General reports on Oliver, Ferrari and NPS did little to clarify the reasoning behind the secretary of the Navy's actions in removing Oliver and Ferrari. Although it is difficult for an outsider to understand the intricacies of Navy rules and regulations, the reports did not substantiate claims of intentional wrongdoing, gross mismanagement or wasteful spending.

What the reports made clear is there is an apparent culture clash regarding the mission and leadership of a public institution that answers to two masters — military and civilian. There also appears to be confusing and competing management and accounting regulations that overlap when civilian and military programs attempt to coexist.

Perhaps most importantly, we learned there was not a single example or finding of illegal activity or improper personal enrichment related to Oliver or Ferrari. It was confirmed that management decisions, although not always popular, were made in the normal course of business, documented fully and processed through appropriate departments for review and approval.

Considerable attention in the IG report is given to expenses paid and reimbursed by the NPS Foundation. The foundation has apparently supported NPS presidents and provosts for more than four decades by funding activities and events that in some cases cannot be funded by tax dollars. The reports challenged accounting procedures used by Oliver, Ferrari and others. But they were clearly not soliciting and receiving personal "gifts" as the public understands the term. The report appears clear they were receiving reimbursements for NPS and foundation expenses and activities.

Oliver and Ferrari responded to a call by previous Navy leadership to modernize military education. The mission was recently defined in the published report of the Committee of the Future of NPS, chaired by retired Rear Adm. Winford G. (Jerry) Ellis. Furthermore, NPS recently completed a comprehensive accreditation review by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges. Both comprehensive reports reviewed NPS from top to bottom over a similar period of time that was reviewed by the IG report. It is impossible to reconcile the committee and WASC reports that publicly praised NPS leadership, management and programing with the published IG reports that reviewed the same institution and leadership during the same time frame and described what they considered to be a culture of wasteful spending and mismanagement.

The authority and right of the secretary of the Navy to change NPS leadership is not at issue. What is concerning is that in this recent transition, there is an apparent intentional effort to destroy the professional careers and reputations of two dedicated, professional and distinguished colleagues. Their record of success and the published reports contradict the claims against them.

We look forward to meeting and working with the new leadership of NPS. However, we ask the Navy to reflect . . . and reconsider recognizing the dedicated efforts, distinguished careers and institutional success of Oliver and Ferrari.

Winick is president and dean of Monterey College of Law. He has served with Oliver and Ferrari on several higher education committees and programs in the Monterey area. The comments represented are individual and do not represent the position of Monterey College of Law.